,Y\  ■ 

The  Chinese  Students’  Committee  on  Washington  Conference 

Office:  505  West  1 24th  Street.  New  York,  N.  Y. 


NEWS 


- LETTER 

December  5,  1 9 'S*  I , 


B 2 


MANCHURIA  IN  THE  CONFERENCE 

During  the  discussion  on  the  surrendering  of  leased  terri- 
tories by  the  foreign  nations  to  China  in  the  Committee  on 
Pacific  and  Far  Eastern  Questions  on  Dec.  3,  the  Japanese 
delegate  Hanihara  took  exception  to  two  important  leased  ter- 
ritories held  by  Japan  in  Manchuria,  namely  Port  Arthur 
and  Talienwan  (variously  spelled  as  Dairen  or  Dalny)  in  South 
Manchuria.  He  made  the  following  statement ; 

“As  to  that  territory',  the  Japanese  delegates  wish  to 
make  it  clear  that  Japan  has  no  intention  at  present  to  re- 
linquish the  important  rights  she  lawfully  acquired  and  at 
no  small  sacrifice.  The  territory  in  question  forms  a part 
of  Manchuria,  a region  where,  by  reason  of  its  close 
proximity  to  Japan’s  territory  more  than  anything  else, 
she  has  vital  interests  in  that  which  relates  to  her  economic 
life  and  national  safety. 

“This  fact  was  recognized  and  assurance  was  given  by 
the  American,  British,  and  French  Governments  at  the 
time  of  the  formation  of  the  international  consortium  that 
these  vital  interests  of  Japan  in  the  region  in  question 
shall  be  safeguarded.” 

But  these  vital  interests  are  not  recognized  by  other  nations. 
Dr.  Paul  S.  Reinsch,  formerly  American  Minister  to  China, 
made  this  statement : 

“In  fact,  the  consortium  never  recognized  Japan’s  vital 
interest  in  Manchuria,  as  stated  by  Mr.  Hanihara.  The 
use  of  the  words  ‘vital  interest’  in  Manchuria  would  im- 
ply very  much  more  than  ‘special  interest,’  which  the  con- 
sortium actually  recognized. 

“The  situation  is  that  the  three  Governments  never  did 
recognize  Japan’s  vital  interests  in  Manchuria,  because 
the  consortium,  consisting  of  America,  Great  Britain  and 
France,  refused  to  recognize  Japan’s  claim  for  vital  inter- 

1 


! “X 

i: 

r\ 


ests.  In  fact,  the  consortium  did  agree  that  no  loans 
should  be  used  in  Manchuria  which  might  affect  the  sov- 
ereignty of  Japan.  They  were  quite  distinctly  averse  to 
recognizing  a special  position  of  Japan  in  Manchuria. 

“In  view  of  the  known  facts,  it  is  surprising  that  this 
statement  should  be  made.” 

Port  Arthur  and  Talienwan  and  other  interests  in  Manchuria 
are  more  vital  to  China  than  to  Japan.  They  concern  China's 
national  safety  and  economic  life  more  than  they  do  Japan’s. 
Port  Arthur  and  Talienwan  were  originally  leased  to  Russia  by 
the  treaty  of  March  27,  1898,  with  the  specific  stipulation  tliat 
“The  term  of  lease  is  fixed  at  twenty-five  years  from  the  date 
of  signature.”  After  Japan  had  violated  China’s  neutrality  and 
committed  great  devastation  on  Chinese  soil  in  the  Russo- 
Japanese  War,  Japan,  on  Dec.  22,  1905,  made  a treaty  with 
China,  regarding  the  transfer  of  the  lease  of  these  two  terri- 
tories and  stipulated,  “The  Im.perial  Japanese  Government  en- 
gage that  in  regard  to  the  leased  territory  as  well  as  in  the 
matter  of  railway  construction  and  exploitation,  they  will,  so 
far  as  circumstances  permit,  conform  to  the  original  agree- 
ments concluded  betiueen  China  and  Russia.’’  Therefore  the 
lease  of  Port  Arthur  and  Talienwan  will  expire  in  1923. 
Japan  would  contend  that  the  period  of  lease  was  extended  to 
99  years  by  the  treaty  and  notes  growing  out  of  the  Twenty- 
one  Demands  of  1915.  But  aside  from  the  iniquity  of  the 
Twenty-one  Demands,  which  were  forced  on  China  without 
the  least  provocation  on  her  part,  the  treaty  and  the  notes 
were  never  ratified  by  the  Chinese  Parliament  and  were  no 
more  binding  on  China  than  the  Treaty  of  Versailles  on  the 
United  States  of  America.  The  Twenty-one  Demands  con- 
stitute an  issue  which  ought  to  be  brought  up  before  the 
conference  for  settlement,  as  they  are  a menace  to  the 
peace  of  the  Far  East. 

THE  LANSING-ISHII  AGREEMENT 

Among  the  vital  issues  of  the  Far  Eastern  problems  that 
ought  to  be  brought  up  before  the  Washington  Conference  for 
discussion  and  disposition,  the  Lansing-Ishii  Agreement  of 
November  2,  1917,  is  certainly  not  to  be  forgotten  or  omitted. 
The  essence  of  the  agreement  is  as  follows : 

2 


“The  Governments  of  the  United  States  and  Japan 
recognize  that  territorial  propinquity  creates  special  rela- 
tions between  countries,  and,  consequently,  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  United  States  recognizes  that  Japan  has 
special  interests  in  China,  particularly  in  the  part  to 
which  her  possessions  are  contiguous.’’ 

That  it  is  within  the  scope  of  the  Washington  Conference 
to  pass  a judgment  on  this  agreement  is  evident,  since  it  neces- 
sarily involves  the  negotiation  of  the  principle  of  equality  of 
nations  as  should  be  applied  under  the  spacious  sky  of  the 
Pacific  and  the  Far  East.  This  being  so,  it  is  a denial  of  a 
fundamental  principle  of  international  good  relationship  and, 
if  left  unremovcd,  cannot  fail  to  breed  ill-feeling  and  conflict. 

From  a Chinese  point  of  view  Japan  intends  to  arrogate  to 
herself  the  power  of  interfering  with  China’s  freedom  to  ac- 
cord equal  treatment  to  all  nations  based  on  international  law 
and  justice.  No  country  can  claim  to  have  any  interests  in 
China  except  those  interests  that  are  granted  or  recognized  by 
China  in  treaty.  The  Lansing-Ishii  Agreement  is  objection- 
able from  another  point  of  view.  That  agreement  was  con- 
cluded with  reference  to  China  without  her  consent,  and  is  de- 
rogatory to  her  honor  and  prestige. 

The  repudiation  of  this  agreement  by  the  Conference  is  of 
the  utmost  importance  to  the  future  good  understanding  be- 
tween China,  United  States  and  Japan.  The  term  special  in- 
terest has  been  variously  interpreted  by  Japan  to  mean  para- 
mount interest  or  vital  interest.  The  agreement  is  as  of  vital 
importance  to  America  as  well  as  to  China.  Recently  an 
American  writer  of  repute  wrote  on  this  agreement  in  the 
following  manner : 

“The  Agreement  was  in  effect  a waiver  of  the  ‘open  door’ 
policy  inaugurated  by  President  McKinley  and  Secretary  of 
State  Hay,  which  open  door  policy  has  been  consistently  ad- 
hered to  ever  since  except  in  the  single  instance  of  the  Lan- 
sing-Ishii  Agreement.  In  view  of  Secretary  Hughes’  recent 
strong  declaration  re-affirming  the  American  policy  of  the 
open  door  in  China,  this  Lansing-Ishii  Agreement  should  be 
denounced  and  repudiated  because  of  its  being  in  conflict  with 
the  re-declaration  of  (the  present)  Administration  of  adher- 
ence to  the  open  door  policy  which  has  been  a fundamental 
principle  of  the  Republican  Party  since  it  was  enunciated. 

3 


"The  Lansing-Ishii  Agreement  should  be  repudiated  and  de- 
nounced because  Japan  has  falsely  translated  it  and  rr^de  un- 
fair use  of  it.  The  Japanese  Imperial  Government  has  caused 
the  agreement  to  be  translated  into  Japanese,  Chinese  and 
Korean,  translating  the  word  ‘special’  as  being  ‘paramount’ 
and  ‘supreme’  and  has  attempted  to  make  the  Chinese  Govern- 
ment and  the  Chinese  people,  the  Korean  people,  and  their  own 
native  Japanese  population,  believe  that  by  this  Agreement  the 
Government  of  the  United  States  had  accepted  and  confirmed 
the  Japanese  claims  of  a ‘paramount’  position  in  China  and  on 
the  Asiatic  Continent. 

“That  the  Imperial  Japanese  Government  well  knew  and 
knows  that  the  Government  of  the  United  States  never  agreed 
to  regard  Japan’s  position  in  China  and  on  the  Asiatic  Main- 
land as  being  paramount,  and  that  it  has  falsely  represented  to 
the  Government  and  peoples  of  the  Far  East,  the  language, 
content  and  purport  of  the  agreement,  with  the  purpose  not 
only  of  enhancing  its  own  prestige  but  particularly  of  destroy- 
ing the  position,  influence  and  prestige  of  the  Government  of 
the  United  States  in  China  and  other  parts  of  the  Far  East. 
The  effects  of  these  false  representations  of  the  meaning  and 
purport  of  the  agreement  can  not  be  cured  by  attempting  to 
circulate  a true  statement  of  the  meaning,  language  and  pur- 
port of  the  agreement,  and  in  view  of  the  false  representations 
made  in  connection  therewith  by  the  Imperial  Government  of 
Japan  and  the  unfair  and  dishonorable  use  made  of  it  thereby 
to  lower  the  prestige  and  to  destroy  the  influence  and  position 
of  the  Government  of  the  United  States,  the  agreement  should 
be  denounced  and  repudiated  without  delay.’’ 

The  real  motive  of  concluding  the  agreement  on  the  part  of 
United  States  has  remained  a mystery.  The  whole  fallacy  lies 
in  the  claim  of  Japan  to  special  interest  on  ground  of  geograph- 
ical propinquity.  If  this  is  true,  then  every  country  must  have 
‘special  interests’  in  as  many  nations  as  they  are  situated  in  its 
vicinity,  and  Canada  or  Mexico  must  have  ‘special  interests’  in 
the  United  States.  And  nothing  would  be  more  preposterous, 
if  Canada  or  Mexico  should  maintain  that  they  have  para- 
mount interests  in  the  United  States.  For  the  interest  of  the 
peace  in  the  Far  East  the  Lansing-Ishii  should  l)e  formallv 
declared  null  and  void  by  the  Washington  Conference. 

4 


